[edit] English 112

[edit] Homework?

Check here!

[edit] What would I like to Improve this year?

My main goals and my whole thought process...

[edit] Wiki-Team

WIK

[edit] To My Interviewer

I recommend my biographer should use the format; The Self in Contradiction.

[edit] My Introduction

Hardcore Mac n Cheese

People make assumptions about everything and usually, these assumptions that people make are wrong. It is especially easy to make assumptions about people when you first meet them; it is a horrible phenomenon known as the “first impression”. When you enter a job interview, you are warned that you have to make a good first impression because if you do not, whomever you are attempting to be employed by will simply never look at your resume. I made the mistake of allowing a first impression to dictate what I thought about Christine Nazario when I first met her. Again, everyone tells me to never let a first impression happen, but it is somewhat inevitable and in a way, it almost becomes as equally important as actually meeting the person because when the contradiction is revealed, the truth that much more astounding and profound. Of course, none of my assumptions and faulty predispositions were correct.

When I first sat down and talked to Christine, I was seriously not looking forward to the entire conversation with her. I thought that I was in for a lousy time with another bimbo who thought life was cheertastic and filled with pompoms and robotically happy facial expressions that border on indicating mild psychosis. Fortunately I was wrong. But I was partially right because by some technicality in the cosmos of life, I found that Christine was a cheerleader in high school, but she had the same dispassionate cool burning disregard for people who have gotten through life on physical attractiveness that I do. But not only was Christine a cheerleader, she was the head cheerleader, the de facto leader of the Cheer Army. And to top that all off, Christine was and fortunately still is incredibly intelligent. Joking with Christine about the validity of cheerleading as a sport, she let her thoughts be heard in an extremely clear and concise manner. See the irony? It gets better. She likes to read. A lot. Back at home, she read more than most doctors feel is completely healthy to sustain eyesight. She loves the way nonfiction stories about people who have to overcome some sort of intensely powerful struggle in their lives seem to leap off the page and into her brain. Right now, she's reading A Million Little Pieces, the book that her literary highness Oprah decreed untouchable goods because of the supposed lies that the book contained within its many, many pages of incredibly fine print. Christine probably is done with the book by now. At the rate that she reads, she goes through literature at a ridiculously pace.

She was born in New Haven, Connecticut and then moved to California when her parents divorced. She lived there until just before high school when she moved back to just a few miles away from her birthplace in North Haven. She's a California girl in Connecticut clothing and she seems to carry the Huntington Beach mentality that she adopted on the West Coast with a sense of grace. She's blissfully oblivious to the apparent contradiction that exists between her California roots dug deep into the sandy beaches of the West Coast and her now snow-capped New England mountain surroundings. She lives somewhere in the city-like Southwest residential area with its complete set of weirdos, future presidents, nice people and shady dealings. Southwest never sleeps yet she does. She does not do much here in college and her life has been notched back to a partially existential level of functioning. She goes to class, does her homework and then bums out. On the weekends, she watches Disney movies because Disney movies are her favorite. She loves animated films because they are so happy and they tell of simple, idyllic moments in life when everything is semi-carefree. It is interesting because it is very clear that she is thriving in Southwest but she does not really fit in with the typical scene of Southwest. She is a self proclaimed homebody with an affinity, like most girls, for the infamous television series Sex and the City who would rather sit in bed on Friday nights with a blanket and pillow than with a bottle and ping pong ball.

She also speaks highly of “hardcore” mac n' cheese. Apparently, the “hardcoreness” of a macaroni and cheese can be quantified by examining the consistency of the cheese covering. A direct relationship is thus formed; the thicker the cheese, the more “hardcore”. She likes her mac n’ cheese so “hardcore” that the thickness of the cheese makes chewing difficult. And, she likes steak. What kind of girl is she?

At some point in life, Christine wants to be a teacher but oddly enough, UMASS does not offer that particular degree among the thousands upon thousands that the university bestows upon the graduating class every year. So for now, Christine is going to get a degree in either biology or psychology. She will then attend graduate school where she will learn the fine art of teaching. Her chosen path is a noble progression through life that is highly indicative of her personal character. I have no doubt that she will conquer all she sets her mind to.

Christine is sort of quirky. Despite everything that she told me, I am still was not sure that I believed it all. And then she told me something really strange that I had never heard before. Apparently, Christine also has this proclivity regarding lying to people that she just met. Her habit is not anything serious and she tells these small lies because it is funny. It is her way of being sarcastic and witty but to this day, I have never come in contact with anyone who subscribes to such an effectively odd discipline of humor. She's a strangely unique person and I really do feel that it is because she is such a contradictory enigma that she exists in the manner that she does today.

The facts present themselves. Christine Nazario is a one-in-a-million type of personality and her combination of talents and motivating factors is driven through contraction. And this, contradictorily to most people's idea of contradiction, is a perfectly positive thing and it works very well for her. She's no dumb cheerleader.

Marco 20:07, 4 December 2007 (EST)

[edit] Psycho-Delic?

Dear Skip Stone, Your book, Hippies from A-Z, gives details on the hippie culture and reasons to keep it alive. What I do not understand is, why should the hippie generation should be revived? Although it was a much larger movement back in the nineteen sixties there is still a substantial presence of the hippie culture in today’s youth. You claim, “We must spread the word, because so much of the hippy philosophy is positive and loving, something sorely lacking in today's world.” but you fail to acknowledge the blatant downfalls of this carefree lifestyle. This subculture that you are trying to keep alive embodies the negatives of our society; promiscuity and it’s adverse effects of STD’s, drugs, and a lack of initiative towards the common good of society. There is no substantial evidence that shows this sub-culture of music loving, pacifist people did anything good for our country. Essentially my goal is to explain the reasons why this culture shouldn’t be revived and how the new age hippies shouldn’t replicate their predecessors mistakes.

The hippies were a group of people that expressed “a moral rejection of the established society.” [McCleary] The four cardinal points of the hippie philosophy were mysticism, indolence, love, and sensuality [Labin 154] The movement started small in the Haight-Ashbury district in San Francisco and grew big with the rebellion of the Vietnam War. The draft affected the young adults that were gravitating toward this disobedience to the government. Some say the hippie generation promoted spontaneity, love for man-kind and disinterest in the money thirsty society we live in. Although their ideals look healthy and admirable what you have failed to see is how degenerate and unsanitary their lifestyle was.

The carelessness of sex was an immensely negative aspect of hippie culture. Pre-marital sex was not frowned upon and almost encouraged in this “go with the flow” culture, in fulfillment of embracing all their desires. “For a hippie, to live is above all to love, which means that if he explores all aspects of love--romantic, sensual, carnal, hallucinogenic--the higher they will rise on the tree of life.” [Labin 23] While spreading their love around who was thinking about pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases? “From 1964 through 1968, the rates of syphilis and gonorrhea in California rose 165 percent, according to published reports.” [Alexander] Sex was seen as another ultimate endeavor that deserved no limitations in their pleasure seeking lifestyle. Hippies were strong believers in what was called “Free Love”, “the right to change partners when the mood kits, the right to homosexual love, a child’s right to masturbate, and even the right to union with lower animals.” [Labin 167]

Drugs were said to give hippies the power “to wash away years of social programming.” [Stevens] The prevalent drugs were marijuana, LSD (acid), and other hallucinogens. LSD was widely to “bring subconscious states of drives to the surface” [Labin 78] The drug-using hippies were negligent in caring about their personal health by taking acid because the user “can most certainly look forward to chronic anxiety, instability, and schizoid tendencies.” [Labin 78] In your article you claimed, “In addition our government should finance research into the medical and cultural uses of other psychedelic chemicals.” You explain how amazing the feeling is on drugs and how our society pushes prescription drugs down children’s throats as your defense but you lack to talk about the negatives of psychedelic drugs. Smoking marijuana impairs lung functioning, and immune system damage while LSD can cause convulsions, comas, or even death. Most of these harmful drugs were accepted as music festivals, which was a mix of live “jam bands” and celebrations. Woodstock was the largest of these festivals it was a 3-day celebration consisting of 500,000 people and the top performers of the hippie era. There were songs dedicated to their drug use. Beatles sang, “get high with a little help from my friends” and Bob Dylan sang, “But I would not feel so all alone, everybody must get stoned.” There were also subtle messages like the Beatles song “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds” which refers to LSD. Why would someone want to reproduce this era. With the education we have on drugs and it’s adverse effects on our bodies, why are you still promoting this lifestyle to the younger generation?

Essentially the hippie culture was dedicated to having no limitations and basically living day-by-day with their only aspiration to be everyone living in peace. How productive could this generation have possibly been? This time period was if not a stand-still then a regression. The majority of people did nothing for society, free-loading in their hedonism. Where would we be today if we all followed in their paths like they wanted? Would we be as technologically advanced if we spend our young adulthood in communes dedicated to living the hippie lifestyle to it’s fullest? “Their highest values proclaimed anti-prosperity, anti-hygiene, and anti-efficiency.” [Labin 15] Most of them were school drop-outs, breeding a youth that screamed ignorance. The only world event their cared about was Vietnam, because of their egocentricity and selfishness. There was no productivity coming from a generation who did not care to further their education and gain knowledge to become an intricate part of our society. Therefore what makes this generation even a candidate for re-living?

In the chapter, Hippie activism, you say, “If you look back at history, you'll find just how many causes we were actively involved with, and how many great things we accomplished.” You may have made footprints for gay rights and stopping the Vietnam war, but how could that generation take credit for it? The hippies tried to take a stand in government, sometimes engaging in protests or wearing buttons but they were never an organized group of people. They had such a lack of motivation they could not even rally their own members into a general party. Possibly if the hippies were not busy experimenting with drugs and planting their seeds they would have time to spread their ideals. They lacked the discipline needed for such a movement and thus they only recognized one another by their eccentric dress and outlandish pins claiming; “Cure Virginity!” and “Studying Causes Cancer!” Their fashion was loud and showed their contempt for conventional dress. “Hippies of both sexes bedecked themselves in long strands or many colored beads, bracelets, multi-colored ribbons, and bright sunglasses.” [Labin 29] Their over-the-top clothing was another way to set themselves apart from the straight laced, clean-shaven society they were trying to escape.

Sex, drugs, and music are usually just signs of adolescent rebellion. The hippie generation was in essence all of these young adult and teenage rebellions running away to a society that accepted this behavior. Essentially the hippie culture was the teenager’s idea of a utopian society where their disobedience was not only common but it was embraced. Hippies indeed shed love but they nothing other than to leave a legacy of being self indulgent, lazy people. They lacked drive for even their own cause. What made them different from an ordinary teenage rebellion was their strength in numbers. The people who felt out of place or were discontent with their lives came together in mostly one concentrated area. What does it tell you when a movement of people is made up of troubled youth? Should the intent of the hippies be still carried on with neo-hippies?

The neo-hippies seem to be the saddest generation of them all. The paramount corporations that they claim to be against are the ones selling them their pre-tie-dyed shirts and ripped jeans. The music industry caters to these “wanna-bee” hippies, making bands like Dave Matthews Band mainstream. To wear a peace sign no longer means living free; it is a fashion statement and the hippie movement has become essentially, “hip.” It has fizzled from a rebellion to just appreciating the movement, which is a good step towards it‘s extinction. “Much of the idealism of the era has been forgotten. The search for self-realization has become selfishness. The expression of sexual joy has become debauchery. Experimentation with mind-expanding drugs has become, for many, indulgence in mind-controlling drugs.” [Devine, Online] I do not know which is worse; being a premier hippie who corralled their peers into degenerative beings or being the latter form who praises their accomplishments, or in my opinion, a lack-there-of.

Looking at other generations you can find significant contributions made by each. Instead of just experimenting with homosexuality the seventies fought for the rights of gays and even improved rights for women. Some say this was due to hippies and their protests for both but I believe this new decade brought about constructive people who did not just sit back and complain about the injustices but took action politically. The eighties gave way to commercially distributed cell-phones and personal computers. It was known for the economic productivity and technological advances. Those generations were inventive and valuable in comparison to hippies. Even knowing this the sixties generation is still the prevailing subculture. You see it embraced here on campus everyday; with the tie-dye, peace signs, and long skirts. I hope they are just wearing their flower children clothing as a means of conforming of popular dress rather than trying to bring back the hippie subculture.

Alexander, Brian. "Free love: Was there a price to pay? ." MSNBC. 5 Nov 2007 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19053382/>.

Stone, Skip. "Hippies from A-Z." Hip Planet. 1999. 5 Nov 2007 <http://www.hipplanet.com/books/atoz/atoz.htm>.

“Youth Movement” Hippies, Freaks, and the Summer of Love. 10 Oct 2007 <http://www.haroldhill.org/chapter-four/page-five- Hippies-freaks-and-the-summer-of-love.htm>

Gurvis, Sandra. Where Have All the Flower Children Gone? Jackson, MI: The University Press of Mississippi, 2006

Labin, Suzzanne. Hippies, Drugs and Promiscuity New Rochelle, NY Arlington House, 1972

Partridge, William. The Hippie Gheto University City: Holt, Rhinehart, and Winston Inc. 1973

Cook, Bruve. The Beat Generation. New York Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1971

Haan, Norma. "Moral and ego stages in relationship to ego processes: A study of 'hippies'." Dec 1973 41.4596-612. 01 Nov 2007 <http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=105&sid=db6cdff8-5387-44dc-98c4-26fa384c702f%40sessionmgr104.>

Devine, Frank. "How Woodstock Passed My By." 48. 01 Nov 2007

Christine 17:32, 27 November 2007 (EST)

Retrieved from "http://www.umasswiki.com/wiki/Hippies"

[edit] Art Objects

I understood where the author was coming from when she claimed that art is like entering a foreign city and that “No one is surprised to find that a foreign city follows its own customs and speaks its own language.” I felt very lost throughout the text when she referred to art definitions such as; canonizing or authority. It made it very hard to relate to this world she was speaking of, almost as if she was doing what the rest of the art world does and keeping it a secret or expecting me to know what she was talking about, something she claimed to be “art arrogance.” Most of the paper was very unfamiliar to me and art is something I not only lack interest in but I truthfully have no affinity for. I dislike the subjectivity of art; how one person can say a painting is a masterpiece and how another could say it is obscure or pointless. This text was true to many things I believed about art. There was a short paragraph that explained one of the problems I have in my own writing. She stated that phrases like “I don’t understand this poem” or “I never listen to classical music” tells nothing about the painting or piece of art but it tells about the author themselves. In my writing I have the tendency to constantly refer back to my own opinion even when writing to an audience who isn’t trying to learn about the author but rather the subject. I have decided to reflect upon how Winterson’s text changed my mind on art and how I learned of it’s importance. There was a certain paragraph that I connected to something I too observed but never took the time to think about. There was a paragraph speaking about Authority, and how if a painting was in the guidebooks half the people would see if for that reason and half the people would not see it for that reason. First I had to look up what Authority meant, and I was confused as to why she would be using such unfamiliar words in an essay directed towards a variety of readers. After looking at definitions I came to the conclusion that by authority, she meant an accepted form of information. I agreed with her and this paragraph made me realize how when I thought of art I thought of things like the Mona Lisa, and well known pieces when in reality art is so many things. That not everyone praises those distinguished paintings, and that there is a world of art beyond what I believed. I love how this part of the text helped me reflect on my own arrogance to think I knew everything about this culture or form of expression. Initially I was confused on the theme of this paper and why I was assigned to read it. I noticed that I was only looking at the text and not into it. I forced myself to re-read and I saw myself looking at each piece differently. After seeing how my mind changed after looking back over the text I noticed the author’s goal; and that is to constantly ask reasons why we do or do not like something until we are able to understand our own reasoning. The first time I read I told myself, I don’t like what I just read and I got nothing from it. The second time I noticed myself relating to the text and becoming more interest on art and it’s purpose. I did exactly what the writer wanted me to do and that is rethink my preconceived notions about art. It was almost the same feeling as Winterson explained when she went to research into museums after that first painting caught her eye. After reading this paper I found myself looking for ways to decorate my room because it reminded me of the creativity and open mindedness that I lack. The part of the text that sparked my interest the most was the conclusion. It talked about how art was inevitable and we may not notice how much it influences our lives. I reflected and noticed how significant art has been in my life. I never would have considered the tacky collages I made or the scrapbook that I decorated would be considered art. I thought this mainly because this art hasn’t been assessed; but to me the kind of art that is beautiful is art that hasn’t been assessed. I don’t like how other peoples opinions can effect my judgment on art. I would probably say Starry Night is beautiful because everyone else says so. I realized that I had to broaden my horizons on what art really was. I could no longer say I was not interested in art because I had revised my classifications for what art is. I love when a reading this makes me change my opinion or bring something to my attention that I have kept in the dark for so long.

[edit] Assesment of the Introduction I Wrote